Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 03/11/2006 5:33:36 PM PST by texassizednightcrawler
The First Amendment to the Constitution is arguably the most important. This amendment, packaged with the nine following it as the Bill of Rights, grants citizens the freedoms of press, speech, religion, peaceful assembly and a right to "petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Freedom of speech cases are often some of the most hotly contested in the country. Recently, a case involving a high school social studies teacher has been given national media attention.
The case involves Denver teacher Jay Bennish, who was put on paid leave from Overland High School after comparing President George W. Bush's State of the Union address to some of Adolph Hitler's speeches.
Defending the allegations, Bennish said, "My job as a social studies teacher is to argue alternative perspectives and viewpoints so that students are aware of those points of view. They are simply thrown out there to encourage critical thought."
We at the Parthenon agree with this sentiment. Whether Bush or Hitler's speeches and policies are similar is not the issue. The issue is American citizens having the right to voice their opinions. We, the politically mixed staff of the Parthenon (contrary to popular belief) always agree unanimously to an open dialogue. After all, it is the First Amendment that gives us the opportunity to print a newspaper four days a week to inform students, faculty, staff, alumni and anyone else who reads the Parthenon of campus events.
Free speech means free speech. One of the bedrocks of our democracy is the right of all citizens to say what they want. Similarly, the foundation of education is for students to be able to think critically about their fields of study. A high school teacher's job is to plant the seeds of critical thought. College is about honing in on that thought and figuring out a place in the world, with beliefs and philosophies in tow, and expanded as much as possible. How can a person pinpoint a set of ideals without trying on a few for size?
Like all presidents, Bush's policies and procedures are up for public debate. At least we hope so. It is up to the people to to challenge all parties' views to determine what is best for the country.
I've tweaked one of Bennish's rants a bit so that it's more representative of the opposing point of view. Any right-thinking public school teacher who cares to try using it in class is welcome to it.
"Do you see how abortion is at odds with a nation that claims to support equal rights? At odds with caring and compassion?
Since Roe v. Wade became the law of the land millions of Americans have been executed for the crime of being unwanted and inconvenient. Executed without a trail. Murdered. Ripped apart in the womb and disposed of as medical waste.
Not only were their lives snuffed out, those who killed them were paid to end their existence. How can individuals who could perform such a callous act for profit call themselves doctors? The last time a physician performed such heinous acts with state sanction his name became so infamous that it is still vividly remembered today - Doctor Josef Mengele.
Now, I'm not saying that those who perform abortions are Nazis perpetrating a Holocaust,but there are some eerie similarities..."
Now, don't worry about saying this in class. I'm sure all the caring, tolerant, and understanding folks on the left side of the aisle will be more than happy to defend your 1st Amendment right to present an opposing point of view. Why, I'll even bet that Matt Lauer will lob a couple of softballs your way!
|I was a geography teacher before I was a social studies teacher|
For you Bennish > oIo
When something starts off with an inaccuracy, what follows is useless drivel.
The First amendment grants nothing. It presupposes such rights already exist and that the government can do nothing to forbid a citizen's exercise of them. In fact, the Bill of Rights grants no rights, it recognizes specific rights we possess and tells the government, "hands off!" Further on, in the Ninth and Tenth amendments, the framers said, "anything we forgot to list here, the rights already exist."
The smartest accumulation of people in history, the founders of the US knew that any right that could be granted could easily be withdrawn.
Free speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of your speech as an college campus liberal demanded Speech Code will document.
Uh..he's a Geography teacher, not a social studies teacher.
---
Free speech means free speech.
True. So if Bennish wants his right to free speech, he needs to NOT be paid.
During class, it's not 'free speech, it's taxpayer funded speech.
Leftists want to remove all mention of God from the public domain, now if we extrapolate to the Declaration of Independence, and remove the 'endowed by our Creator', this would than mean that our rights are given by the government - if our rights are given by the government than the government can take away those rights.
I really don't think these Socialist Left wing liberal idiots have thought the whole removing 'in God we trust' thing through enough.
On the one hand they kick and scream about Bush being a 'dictator' and how the US is a tyranny, while on the other they pave the way for a genuine state of tyranny.
But then, liberal left thinking isn't exactly grounded in reality now, is it?
I wish I could shake 'em by the shoulders and say 'look, this is reality - see how different it is from your fantasies? Now wake up!". Wishful thinking...
The actual prope issue with Bennish is incompetence and irrelevance. He is supposed to be teaching Geography, not Militant Socialism and Revolution. In order to properly utilize Mr. Blemish's talents the school should institute a class in Problems of Revolution or Stridency in Vacuity.
So then I assume that the Marshall University school newspaper has published the Mohammed cartoons.
We could send him on a cultural exchange to Cuba.
Nothing in Freedom of Speech releases the speaker from consequences. It is true that the government may not limit free speech beyond the obvious limits of slander, incitement, etc. but other hearers may take legitimate action to the disadvantage of the speaker.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
The government isn't censoring the teacher but giving him guidance and direction and correction regarding improper or inappropriate material in his classroom.
His employer, the school, has every right AND DUTY to ensure that his classes are taught properly or as they see fit.
He went out of bounds and was brought back in.
No one is saying that he can't rant about Bush being like HItler and this isn't a Free Speech case. On his own time he can say anything he pleases.
Precisely. Free speech doesn't mean free speech. The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law..." It means just that, only that and nothing but that. The Dixie Chicks made the same error in thinking that free speech means free speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.